Standards Commission to appeal ruling in Higgins misconduct case

The watchdog said the judgment could have “wider, serious implications” for bodies responsible for regulating or disciplining individuals and that an appeal was necessary to establish legal certainty over the conduct of its hearings.

The appeal is expected to delay the long-running case against Ms Higgins, with the commission acknowledging that the misconduct hearing will have to be postponed.

The case concerns social media comments made by Ms Higgins after she obtained internal Glasgow City Council emails through freedom of information legislation. She accused a former council finance director of abusing influence to “wilfully and cynically mislead councillors and the public” over proposed cuts to teaching posts and called for an investigation.

The Standards Commission is examining whether the comments breached the Councillors’ Code of Conduct.

Ms Higgins challenged the commission’s decision to prevent seven documents, including emails and budget material, from being used at the substantive hearing. She argued that the documents provided important factual context for her comments and were necessary for her to rely on her right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Lord Sandison ruled in her favour in relation to all seven documents.

He found that the commission had “shut its ears” to submissions Ms Higgins proposed to make by preventing the material from being used at the hearing “and in so doing acted unlawfully.”

He also warned that excluding potentially relevant material “risks creating the impression, accurate or not, that the issue has been pre-judged”.

The ruling did not determine whether Ms Higgins had breached the Code of Conduct – only that the seven documents could not be excluded from the proceedings in the manner proposed by the commission.

Lord Sandison found that the documents could assist in establishing the factual background to Ms Higgins’s comments and in assessing whether any interference with her freedom of expression was justified.

He said: “A close assessment of the facts and circumstances would be necessary in order to determine the application of Article 10 to the post.”

The judge also said the documents demonstrated “the strength of the factual basis for the value judgments in the post” and the “seriousness of the issues and the acuity of the public interest” involved.

The commission said it was concerned about the implications of that finding for its ability to conduct “fair, proportionate and efficient hearings”.